And so does dumbbells or sandbags! Many experienced lifters think that dumbbells stimulates an even more natural movement pattern than barbells – why do you think they are wrong about that?

I don't think they are - for certain movements like presses. I mentioned the problems earlier. One is mechanics for lifts such as the squat and deadlift (such as the back angle produced with a barbell deadlift vs say dumbbell). The other is difficulty with linear progression. How do you increase the sandbag by 5lb every workout? How do you bench press a sand bag? How do you get 300lb of sandbags on your back?

Remember you're not just doing the same weight over and over, nor can you make big jumps. So if you're training with more "real" objects like sandbags or stones, it's a problem. Say I lift stones. Today I lift a 100lb stone for reps across. Next workout I should try to lift 105lb. Do I have a 105lb stone? What about 110lb, 115lb, etc? There's also the issue of size. How big is a 400lb sandbag? I might have the strength to pull that weight off the floor, but if it's too cumbersome it will be a poor training instrument. For example, you might have a 500lb deadlift, but won't be able to lift a couch all by yourself that only weighs 100lb because of the weight distribution and sheer size. It's just not practical after a certain point.

Originally Posted by Gorbag

Why do you have to put them on your shoulders at all? You can do hack-squats standing on a block holding heavy dumbbells behind your body. Yes, it gives a somehow different stimulus than a back squat, but if you build overall muscles in your body then you must have a general strength carryover “to life” also from doing that? And you can combine it with leg press also, so barbells squat is still not a must if you are not a competing power lifter.

I'm having a hard time visualizing what you're proposing. Do you have a picture of this?

Also, how do you get the dumbbells there, where do you get 150lb+ dumbbells, and how do you increase the weight by only 5lb total?

Originally Posted by Gorbag

Depends on your goals I would say! And why does it have to be either or? Dumbbells, machines and barbells, they all have their pro and cons, use them all is my general recommendation, if you does not have specific goals…

Barbells and dumbbells are largely superior to machines. Barbells are not necessarily superior to dumbbells, but because of mechanics and logistics for certain lifts, they are the better tool for the job overall.

And so does dumbbells or sandbags! Many experienced lifters think that dumbbells stimulates an even more natural movement pattern than barbells – why do you think they are wrong about that?

One thing, I definitely prefer either weighted dips or dumbbells for chest work. I've relegated the barbell bench to "when hell freezes over". Actually I'd argue dips and weight chins are much more "full body" than the bench press. Every single reason you can come up with that you think squat trumps leg press on can be directly applied in a logical sense to why dips trump bench press . Not saying I actually subscribe to such logic myself, but if you do then the cognitive dissonance of arguing in favor of bench press may very well be enough to make your head explode.

I don't think they are - for certain movements like presses. I mentioned the problems earlier. One is mechanics for lifts such as the squat and deadlift (such as the back angle produced with a barbell deadlift vs say dumbbell). The other is difficulty with linear progression. How do you increase the sandbag by 5lb every workout? How do you bench press a sand bag? How do you get 300lb of sandbags on your back?

So you have never been to a real hardcore old school gym that also includes sandbags have you? Some of them can be refilled yes, also with less than 5 pounds, and chained hang up mechanism for back squats etc. Also yes, it’s possible to bench press and even better do heavy pullovers with them…

Originally Posted by quikky

I'm having a hard time visualizing what you're proposing. Do you have a picture of this?

Like a barbell hack-lift or hack-squat only with heavy dumbbells that you hold behind your body. You stand on a block to get a full rom ass to floor movement, very hardcore but more easy on your spine than a back squat…

One thing, I definitely prefer either weighted dips or dumbbells for chest work. I've relegated the barbell bench to "when hell freezes over". Actually I'd argue dips and weight chins are much more "full body" than the bench press. Every single reason you can come up with that you think squat trumps leg press on can be directly applied in a logical sense to why dips trump bench press . Not saying I actually subscribe to such logic myself, but if you do then the cognitive dissonance of arguing in favor of bench press may very well be enough to make your head explode.

Yes, I generally agree. Dips is a great upper body pressing movement, and the broad V dips is one of the best developer for upper chest and delts, while the narrow grip hits the triceps and front delts more, so it is also possible to specialise on dips where you want most of the impact...

Bench press became popular when chesticles did. The standing press more accurately fits the criteria quikky and I are defending. And it was the measure of upper body strength until the magazines told men care about pecs.

Push press with a heavy sandbag is even better "for life" than barbell pushpress are...

Now we're debating minutiae. Push press takes part of the range of motion away from the upper body. Also hard to judge consistency between reps (e.g. are you pushing the floor harder with your legs or actually pressing more strongly). And some sandbag designs might limit the bottom of the ROM if they sit on your chest.

But that's really neither here nor there. If you want to use another implement besides a barbell where you can progressively load weight and do full-ROM compound movements, have at it. I think it's easier to throw a few more plates on my barbell than sit there with a measuring cup and buckets and buckets of sand, but that's clearly a matter of personal preference.

So you have never been to a real hardcore old school gym that also includes sandbags have you? Some of them can be refilled yes, also with less than 5 pounds, and chained hang up mechanism for back squats etc. Also yes, it’s possible to bench press and even better do heavy pullovers with them…

Gorbag, like Rich said, now you're just nitpicking. If you genuinely think adding 5lb to a sandbag every workout, and using chains to get it to a proper position, and all this crap you have to do to make it usable for progressive training is more efficient than just using a barbell with some plates, then go ahead and train with sandbags in a "real hardcore old school gym".

Originally Posted by Gorbag

Like a barbell hack-lift or hack-squat only with heavy dumbbells that you hold behind your body. You stand on a block to get a full rom ass to floor movement, very hardcore but more easy on your spine than a back squat…

How do you lift 150lb dumbbells (for a 300lb squat, it's even worse for anything heavier) off the floor and get them behind your back, especially without affecting your energy and strength levels for the lift itself? I really think you're arguing for the sake of arguing now.

Gorbag, like Rich said, now you're just nitpicking. If you genuinely think adding 5lb to a sandbag every workout, and using chains to get it to a proper position, and all this crap you have to do to make it usable for progressive training is more efficient than just using a barbell with some plates, then go ahead and train with sandbags in a "real hardcore old school gym".

Nitpicking? Look at your post you asked questions about just that! So we can finally agree upon that barbells are not indispensable for strength training and progressive overload then?

Originally Posted by quikky

How do you lift 150lb dumbbells (for a 300lb squat, it's even worse for anything heavier) off the floor and get them behind your back, especially without affecting your energy and strength levels for the lift itself? I really think you're arguing for the sake of arguing now.

You can lift them from the dead position, like a deadlift, or you can keep them on a bench in front of you, grab them and let them swing behind your body with less energy lost than unracking the bar when squatting. And you don't need to use exactly the same weight as in a squat either. My point is only that you can progress on other stuff than just barbells, and probably better for general muscle development or "for whatever life can throws at you" than barbells only. Use a variety of dumbbells, barbells and maschines or even sandbags! Hell, when I trained in japan for judo we did behind the neck pushpress with living persons! If thats not training for life what then is it?